Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/Interstate 496

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways | Assessment | A-Class Review

Interstate 496

edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article promoted. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 18:07, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

Interstate 496 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: Working on photos, but this would link the Capitol Loop to Interstate 96 and improve Michigan's place on the FA/A list for WP:USRD/CONN. Also, like I-696, it has some interesting history documented in newspaper articles, making it a good future FA candidate.
Nominated by: Imzadi 1979 → 03:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 03:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Review by Dough4872

edit
Review by Dough4872

Comments:

  1. Is I-496 the Oldsmobile Freeway, the Olds Freeway, or the R.E. Olds Freeway? The article is inconsistent about this.
  2. I don't see how the MDOT map and Google Maps can support the claim that Lansing Road was formerly US 27. Maybe a historical map can be added as a reference here.
  3. "The south side of the freeway is park land adjacent to the confluence of the Grand and Red Cedar rivers." maybe could mention the name of the park here.
  4. "I-496 runs parallel to the north side of the rail line while Malcolm X Street follows to the south as far as the Clemens Avenue overpass. I-496 crosses into East Lansing near the Red Cedar Natural Area" you begin two consecutive sentences with I-496.
  5. Some details about the planning of I-496 should be added to the history. The freeway did not just pop up one day.
  6. The history may need to be reorganized to keep events in chronological order. The details about the controversies planning the freeway should be before the opening and subsequent history.
  7. There are some route designations mentioned in the history that do not intersect the current I-496. Maybe you should mention what these routes are called today. Dough4872 13:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replies:

  1. Officially, in the eyes of the state, it's the R.E. Olds Freeway, also signed as just the Olds Freeway. (Except for the two separate Ford Freeways in Michigan, most of the others can be found with the first name or the initials of the honoree dropped for simplicity.) The City of Lansing named their section the Oldsmobile Freeway after the car, but the state superseded that as the other freeways in the state are named for the founders of auto companies, not the brands of cars their produced. This is all explained in the history section.
  2. Will add.
  3. Added.
  4. Fixed.
  5. The planning is in the now-first paragraph of the history. I added some 1955 and 1958 details, but that's what I have.
  6. The history is organized by topic since the events overlap. Either we jump around in time but keep the topics together logically, or we split everything up to keep it chronological. In this case, a strict timeline doesn't work well, but I did flip two paragraphs around in order to minimize the effect.
  7. I'll look over these in a little while to see if I can't insert street names. Imzadi 1979 → 20:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Waiting for comment #7 to be addressed. Dough4872 00:40, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And done. Imzadi 1979 → 02:09, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by SounderBruce

edit

I will do an image review in a couple minutes. SounderBruce 03:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to see a picture of the road itself, but the current images are in order. Just waiting for a person with OTRS access to verify the Capital Loop shield is PD. SounderBruce 03:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Confirmed --Rschen7754 03:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support SounderBruce 03:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've added two photos to the RD, so you might want to update to clarify those as well. Imzadi 1979 → 22:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Both images look good, still supporting SounderBruce 22:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by TCN7JM

edit
Review by TCN7JM

I'll review once Dough is done. TCN7JM 14:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. "The freeway was built starting in 1963 and completed on December 18, 1970." sounds a bit awkward with the gerund followed by the -ed verb. Maybe reword it a bit.
  2. "two-thirds mile" looks wrong. I'd change it to "two-thirds of a mile" or some such.

This isn't it, I'm just getting exhausted. I'll finish later. TCN7JM 02:27, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both are tweaked. Imzadi 1979 → 07:57, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Why was the freeway named I-496 as opposed to I-296 as it was originally planned?
  2. I'm a bit confused with the turn of events in 1966. Was a new freeway opened altogether or was US 127 just rerouted onto the I-496 freeway? Or was it both? If so, it should be made a bit clearer.
  3. What exactly is a weave-merge lane? It isn't explained, and the redlink that's there to accompany it doesn't help with that issue.
  4. You don't use "the I-496" anywhere else in the article, it seems, so using it that once near the end of the second paragraph of the History is inconsistent.
  5. So, it was never officially named after Ralph W. Crego?
  6. The Capital Loop section bothers me a bit. Almost none of it is sourced at all. You'd think with the main article being a FA you could duplicate some of the sources.

Well, that is all for my review right now. TCN7JM 23:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replies:

  1. I-296 was used for an Interstate in the Grand Rapids area; the original numbering plan had that as I-196 and what is now I-196 was going to be I-67.
  2. Tweaked
  3. A weave-merge lane is where the entrance ramp from one interchange continues as an additional lane and forms the exit ramp of the next interchange.
  4. Looks like that's an artifact from some other older wording. Not sure why it's there, but it's gone now.
  5. Nope, it wasn't.
  6. Added. Imzadi 1979 → 14:36, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it at all possible, for #1, to mention why the name was switched? It just switches from it being planned as I-296 to it being constructed as I-496. TCN7JM 21:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    There's little documentation on the why for the switch, other than the fact that the feds just switched the numbers. Most of the 3dIs in Michigan received different numbers from Michigan's original proposals, either to follow the even/odd rule, or to remove proposed 2dI numbers in favor of 3dIs. I've added what I could though. Imzadi 1979 → 03:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good now. I will support the article's promotion to A-Class. TCN7JM 03:27, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support issues resolved. --Rschen7754 21:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck by Rschen7754

edit

Unfortunately I do not have access to the remainder. --Rschen7754 04:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should have the other articles in your in box by now. Imzadi 1979 → 16:44, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  Done --Rschen7754 17:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Highways/Assessment/A-Class_Review/Interstate_496&oldid=1206625610"